Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Department's review order under Section 129D of the Customs Act, 1962 was passed within the prescribed period of three months computed from the date of communication of the adjudication order, and whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was in dismissing the departmental appeal as time barred.
Analysis: Section 129D(3) requires the review order to be made within three months from the date of communication of the decision or order of the adjudicating authority. The record did not establish before the Commissioner (Appeals) the date on which the Order-in-Original was received by the reviewing authority, and repeated requests to produce the original files did not yield supporting evidence. In the absence of reliable proof of timely receipt, the Commissioner (Appeals) adopted the available material and treated the review as beyond time. The Tribunal found no basis to displace that conclusion, especially when the Department failed to substantiate its claim that the order had been received on a later date.
Conclusion: The departmental challenge to the finding of limitation failed, and the dismissal of the appeal as time barred was upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: Where Section 129D of the Customs Act, 1962 prescribes a review period from the date of communication of the adjudication order, the Department must establish that date by reliable evidence; failing such proof, a finding that the review is time barred will stand.